- Put "revisit tracking formula" on our to-look-at list, and particularly consider revising how sig radius and sig res are treated (either make this comparison more prominent or pull it out and use the damage scaling on all turrets, possibly with some additional adjustments TBC)

I think you should look into making distance modify sig radius, since the further away you are from the other target, the smaller it is relatively, and the harder it should be to hit. I don't think falloff really simulates that properly as it is today.

I agree with this. Falloff should be the decreased chance to hit with distance. I am glad to see great support for removing eWar immunity and stopping locked refitting.

I want to see collision damage. If a fleet is holding at 1500m on a Titan, instead of the Titan saying, Hey! Who bumped me? He might say, Would someone wipe that mess off my hull? (as the frig or cruiser goes splat). Little ships will respect its presence a lot more.

I want to see Doomsdays being limited to structures and the other weapons boosted to Dread standards at least. One-shot DDs make only the Titan and Supers viable and thus deployed on the battlefield. The rest are only deployed with the knowledge that they will likely die, which is a hard tactic to follow.

Grayscale, you also said that the problem wasnt that Titans are hitting too often, the problem is that when they do hit, they insta gib what theyre shooting at.

I really think weapon grouping is your culprit here. If I understand the mechanic correctly, one chance to hit calculation is done and the resultant damage is multiplied by the number of weapons in the group right?

well look at it this way:If you have a single group of 6 titan guns with a 50% chance to hit, (forgetting the damage variation for a minute) they will nail your target with a ton of damage 50% of the timeAs opposed to:If you have 6 independent guns each with a 50% chance to hit, the chance that all of them hit is .5^6 or 1.5625%

essentially what gun grouping does is amplify the alpha strike potential of any given ship, which isnt usually a problem unless, as in this case, youre relying on one ship to destroy the target in one volley.

I think my solution (especially now that TiDi is such a success) would be to disallow XL gun grouping. This would require the titans to have much more coordination if they want to go titan blaping.

Don't forget that this titan will also only intablap every second ship, or at least need 2 shots on average. Also that comparison of the chance of all 6 (single) guns hitting at once is only relevant if the target isn't destroyed with 5. Many ships that shouldn't be instablappable at ALL with guns that size (anything frig sized, or more relevantly dictors or even HIC) can probably be shot with just half the guns, which is the exact amount of guns that would (on average) hit with a 50% hit chance.So, with weapon grouping disallowed for XLs a titan would on average need 2 volleys against anything tanked to the exact extent of the guns alpha. It would still need just one shot against anything sufficiently smaller (requiring 1/2 total alpha or less). Currently it needs 2 shots on average for all ships that can't tank at least 1x total alpha damage, as it would also have a 50% chance to miss anything on the first attempt. You can't just ignore the "other 50%" of that hit chance!

Also, the hit chance of a titan is quite often much higher and nowhere near that 50% you use as an example.

What about removing DDs, reducing Titans bonus to XL weapons to a flat 125% (and leaving XLs unchanged), and adding a new class of turrets specifically for Titans that allow them to do similar DPS to their current XL setups but with 2-4x the gun signature size. Then go through the DB and douple/quadruple the size of capship sig radii as appropriate to match.

This would let Titans either fit for flexibility (but lower overall damage) or anti-cap/structure duty (but sacrificing their ability to hit subcaps). Axing DDs will make using normal caps against Titans a little saner. I don't even think you'd need to go through the DB and change POS gear sigs to work with the new guns because structures don't move.

Posted - 2012.04.05 23:34:00 -
[664] - Quote
I like Ganthrithor's idea a lot. You don't even need new models for the new class of turrets, they could be tech II, higher caliber or other advanced variants of existing XL models. Don't forget about buffing hics and dics, I want more titan killmails. What happened to the supercarrier point module idea?

Already doing this The "balance team" is pretty small, and we talk to each other about all of these things, don't worry And yeah, we'd love to move balance to a place where the "core concept" ship is making up say 40-50% of the fleet rather than 80%+.

Found your problem. If you don't have the resources why don't you wait until you do instead of pushing for a mindless quick fix ?

What about removing DDs, reducing Titans bonus to XL weapons to a flat 125% (and leaving XLs unchanged), and adding a new class of turrets specifically for Titans that allow them to do similar DPS to their current XL setups but with 2-4x the gun signature size. Then go through the DB and douple/quadruple the size of capship sig radii as appropriate to match.

By "flat 125%" do you mean 25% per level or "ahahaha **** your titan V skill" 125% role bonus?

1. Re-fitting in combat. CCP states it is not like it was thought to be and thus can be changed the moment they need it. I suppose it is one of those points, that actual implementation is much better, then designed. Taking it away would limit tactical abilities and would reduce the interest in the game. Very sad. If the problem is with supers - deal with supers. One of the best fights I've had was mostly fun and hard cos of constant jammers re-fit in fight.

2. XL sig scaling. Has CCP once again forgotten, that there are places like wormholes? Or has CCP forgotten there are other ships using XL turrets, but titans? I agree, that after Dreads buff they are a little overpowered in WH engagements, since they can easily kill even T3 ships, if properly prepared. However, the suggested change can greatly impact even PVE aspect too - dreads are commonly used to shoot Sleeper BS. Drastically limiting Dreds use for PVE in wormholes can put some corporations between the choice of staying in WH with lower profits (and still living in high-risk environment where you have to use expensive ships), or go farming Incursions.

If going forward with XL scaling I would suggest, that for wormholes such side-changes are needed to keep dreads "alive":1. Modified sig-radius used in calculation2. Sleepless Guardian BS sig radius increased

And some option to still making dreads in WH able play their role in sub-capital engagements. Though limited.

Already doing this The "balance team" is pretty small, and we talk to each other about all of these things, don't worry And yeah, we'd love to move balance to a place where the "core concept" ship is making up say 40-50% of the fleet rather than 80%+.

Found your problem. If you don't have the resources why don't you wait until you do instead of pushing for a mindless quick fix ?

Yea, because throwing more people with more opinions at a problem surely solves it in no time... It's not the amount of work that has to be done (which would require more people), it's just that the problem has to be analyzed, possible solutions evaluated and finally one has to be implemented. Since this is about a small fix for the short term, and not about a redesign of an entire ship class, few people will produce better results. For idea-input - where multiple people would possibly come in handy - there is this thread (and quite a few older ones I might add). This is the perfect use of resources if you ask me.

1. Re-fitting in combat. CCP states it is not like it was thought to be and thus can be changed the moment they need it. I suppose it is one of those points, that actual implementation is much better, then designed. Taking it away would limit tactical abilities and would reduce the interest in the game. Very sad. If the problem is with supers - deal with supers. One of the best fights I've had was mostly fun and hard cos of constant jammers re-fit in fight.

2. XL sig scaling. Has CCP once again forgotten, that there are places like wormholes? Or has CCP forgotten there are other ships using XL turrets, but titans? I agree, that after Dreads buff they are a little overpowered in WH engagements, since they can easily kill even T3 ships, if properly prepared. However, the suggested change can greatly impact even PVE aspect too - dreads are commonly used to shoot Sleeper BS. Drastically limiting Dreds use for PVE in wormholes can put some corporations between the choice of staying in WH with lower profits (and still living in high-risk environment where you have to use expensive ships), or go farming Incursions.

If going forward with XL scaling I would suggest, that for wormholes such side-changes are needed to keep dreads "alive":1. Modified sig-radius used in calculation2. Sleepless Guardian BS sig radius increased

And some option to still making dreads in WH able play their role in sub-capital engagements. Though limited.

Dreads aren't PVE machines, didnt you read grey post a PVP ship isnt a pVE ship so you will get your nerf eventually.

Posted - 2012.04.06 19:12:00 -
[670] - Quote
In wormholes dreads are PVE machines too, not the least cos they trigger capital escalations people farm. And if CCP did not plan capitals to be used in PVE in wormholes - why would they make additional spawns if nasty BS when capitals come to grid?Now they spawn sleepers and shoot them (and sometimes they can even die, in newbies hands). With such a nerf they would be needed just to make spawns.

What about removing DDs, reducing Titans bonus to XL weapons to a flat 125% (and leaving XLs unchanged), and adding a new class of turrets specifically for Titans that allow them to do similar DPS to their current XL setups but with 2-4x the gun signature size. Then go through the DB and douple/quadruple the size of capship sig radii as appropriate to match.

By "flat 125%" do you mean 25% per level or "ahahaha **** your titan V skill" 125% role bonus?

I was thinking role bonus 125% to XLs, with a %/level bonus for the new XXLs, but you could do a per level bonus for both, I guess.

Posted - 2012.04.06 23:25:00 -
[673] - Quote
I do not know if this was mentioned, but for this:

Quote:

- Introduce an attribute that lets us scale turret damage based on raw unmodified sig radius, and set this to approximately capital-size on XL weapons

You will effectively kill capital farming in Wormhole space, because Sleeper Guardians have a base sig of 350 and turrets have 1000 sig resolution. Right now you can hit them pretty solid - just slow them down with webs and shoot. But if you throw 3-4 ships with 2-4 painters each it does wonders with the damage and ability to track targets. Down side? You need like ~10 real people to pull it off (not 10 characters, but really around 10 living persons sitting at their computers and doing stuff).

So my point is - the resulting signature should count, not the base signature (and this partially makes those solo multi-boxer life in C5-C6 much harder and encourages people interaction). If people want to shoot subcaps from titans - they will have to bring support with painters. Together with correcting the tracking it should force people to bring webbing ships on the field too (and they have to get pretty close to the targets).

- Stop people from refitting their ships while they're being targeted.

Ben Booley and I talked this over and we have an alternate solution.

Stop people from refitting their ships when they have an aggression timer. This will stop aggressive Titans and Dreads from refitting while still allowing bait / cyno / triage carriers not being aggressive to do so.Jester's Trek: wherein I ramble about EVE Online, gaming, and from time to time... life.

Refitting in mid-combat is an emergent game-play mechanic that encourages creativity and player skill over skill points and blobs. You should be encouraging this and pushing it down to smaller alliances and corps (through a Tender-class ship, for instance, plug plug), not removing it where it exists today. Your statement that corps and alliances should be using SMAs as forward refitting points unfortunately shows that you don't understand how combat refitting as a tactic is being used in the field.

SMAs are fine for wormholes and for massive sov invasions. But sometimes you just want to get 20 friends together and roam 20 or 30 jumps into the other guy's space and cause a little havoc. A roaming gang is already at a massive disadvantage thanks to the defeders's POSs, stations, ability to reship and refit, free repairs, jump bridges, intel, etc etc etc. What's wrong with giving the people doing the roaming the maximum number of advantages possible when they get there?Jester's Trek: wherein I ramble about EVE Online, gaming, and from time to time... life.

Oh, and on the larger issue: Greyscale, I respect you, but you're not thinking this through.

Refitting in mid-combat is an emergent game-play mechanic that encourages creativity and player skill over skill points and blobs. You should be encouraging this and pushing it down to smaller alliances and corps (through a Tender-class ship, for instance, plug plug), not removing it where it exists today. Your statement that corps and alliances should be using SMAs as forward refitting points unfortunately shows that you don't understand how combat refitting as a tactic is being used in the field.

SMAs are fine for wormholes and for massive sov invasions. But sometimes you just want to get 20 friends together and roam 20 or 30 jumps into the other guy's space and cause a little havoc. A roaming gang is already at a massive disadvantage thanks to the defeders's POSs, stations, ability to reship and refit, free repairs, jump bridges, intel, etc etc etc. What's wrong with giving the people doing the roaming the maximum number of advantages possible when they get there?

You need to write a post about this ... being on page GjP of this thread, it likely is not going to get read. One of your posts is likely to catch the eye of someone at CCP and it should/could get passed onto to CCP Carebear Greyscale.The STAIN Travel Bookmark Collection - 451 Bookmarks

- Stop people from refitting their ships while they're being targeted.

Ben Booley and I talked this over and we have an alternate solution.

Stop people from refitting their ships when they have an aggression timer. This will stop aggressive Titans and Dreads from refitting while still allowing bait / cyno / triage carriers not being aggressive to do so.

Because everyone enjoys shooting a thing and then having to wait 15 minutes to refit their ship regardless of what's going on at the time.

Posted - 2012.04.07 07:14:00 -
[678] - Quote
I'd be in favor of modifying in-space fitting so that it comes with some sort of timer. Instant fitting should only be an option when docked. Armor plates shouldn't be able to magically and instantly appear on your ship just because you're sitting next to a carrier (or a Tender, which is a great idea!)

I'd say that being immobilized for the duration of the fitting operation (say, one minute? 30 seconds? 5 minutes? open for debate?) would be a good compromise. The farther we can take this concept away from "push / to switch weapons" while still keeping this cool emergent tactic in the game the better.I'd rather die in battle against a man who will lie to me, than for a man who will lie to me.

- Stop people from refitting their ships while they're being targeted.

Ben Booley and I talked this over and we have an alternate solution.

Stop people from refitting their ships when they have an aggression timer. This will stop aggressive Titans and Dreads from refitting while still allowing bait / cyno / triage carriers not being aggressive to do so.

Because everyone enjoys shooting a thing and then having to wait 15 minutes to refit their ship regardless of what's going on at the time.

Sorry, good call. Meant a 60 second aggression timer, not the full 15 minute timer.Jester's Trek: wherein I ramble about EVE Online, gaming, and from time to time... life.

I'd be in favor of modifying in-space fitting so that it comes with some sort of timer. Instant fitting should only be an option when docked. Armor plates shouldn't be able to magically and instantly appear on your ship just because you're sitting next to a carrier (or a Tender, which is a great idea!)

I'd say that being immobilized for the duration of the fitting operation (say, one minute? 30 seconds? 5 minutes? open for debate?) would be a good compromise. The farther we can take this concept away from "push / to switch weapons" while still keeping this cool emergent tactic in the game the better.

EDIT: You could think of it as having a pit crew. How quickly they can change out a ship's modules. Could be based on ship sizes, it being easier (faster) to change fittings with smaller ships, or few modules changed out. Could even be a skill for it, if that sounds reasonable. Carriers could have faster refit times than Tenders (assuming CCP adds in Tenders.) And so on, so forth.

This might well work better, and since the intention is to make supercap refitting less practical without neccessarily impacting smaller classes to the same extent, the refit timer could even scale according to the ship size (it takes longer to move those modules into place when the fitting slot is 10km away at the other end of the hull).

- Stop people from refitting their ships while they're being targeted.

Ben Booley and I talked this over and we have an alternate solution.

Stop people from refitting their ships when they have an aggression timer. This will stop aggressive Titans and Dreads from refitting while still allowing bait / cyno / triage carriers not being aggressive to do so.

Because everyone enjoys shooting a thing and then having to wait 15 minutes to refit their ship regardless of what's going on at the time.

Sorry, good call. Meant a 60 second aggression timer, not the full 15 minute timer.

Problem with that idea is that once the crimewatch changes come into effect, repping someone with aggression will give you the 60 second aggro timer (this is a good change but it makes using aggro timers for refitting less helpful).

This might well work better, and since the intention is to make supercap refitting less practical without neccessarily impacting smaller classes to the same extent, the refit timer could even scale according to the ship size (it takes longer to move those modules into place when the fitting slot is 10km away at the other end of the hull).

Makes sense. Considering how fast a carrier can move, and the size of a titan, replacing it's armor membrane or something would take a while.Take all the techBuild all the titansDrop all the POSes

Posted - 2012.04.08 19:12:00 -
[684] - Quote
Is there any way that we can get CCP to reconsider their position on removing combat refitting as an option for pilots?

I really dont think such a sweeping change should be made in a "quick, surgical adjustment to solve a specific issue"

Im of the same opinion on the XL gun damage scaling because this is a totally unprecedented change, but that, i can live with. (can we at least get the siege module tracking penalty removed?)

Im just not sure that you guys fully understand the ramifications of what is going on here, or just how critical the ability to refit is to a triage carrier or a dread in siege. I think you many unintentionally be nerfing small gang warfare; i understand the need to balance for the masses, but does that necessitate screwing over the minorities? isnt there a middle ground we can find?

Is there any way that we can get CCP to reconsider their position on removing combat refitting as an option for pilots?

I really dont think such a sweeping change should be made in a "quick, surgical adjustment to solve a specific issue"

Im of the same opinion on the XL gun damage scaling because this is a totally unprecedented change, but that, i can live with. (can we at least get the siege module tracking penalty removed?)

Im just not sure that you guys fully understand the ramifications of what is going on here, or just how critical the ability to refit is to a triage carrier or a dread in siege. I think you many unintentionally be nerfing small gang warfare; i understand the need to balance for the masses, but does that necessitate screwing over the minorities? isnt there a middle ground we can find?

IIRC they already said (when they first announced the 50% tracking cut) that siege modules would lose the penalty.

I can see the logic behind this suggestion, however it will drastically limit tactical options. How is this for a "mid point":Non-targeted ships can refit as current mechanics standTargeted ships suffer the same capacitor penalties when refitting that ships suffer when off-lining and on-lining modules.

This is interesting.

Yes; this would at least slightly handicap supercaps when refitting in a large battle. I say slightly because with a decent triage fleet supporting you, the energy RRs can cap you up fairly fast. it will depend on the neuting pressure your fleet is under as to how effective this is; if you are under no neuting then you will be able to refit fairly regularly (every few minutes?) but if you are being neuted to hell and back, you will have to choose wisely.

I think that refitting, targeted or not, should dump your cap and any shield extenders you have, just like we w-space denizens suffer when faffing about in w-space.

Since we are on mid-battle logistics, you should not be able to swap ships when targeted; this would eliminate the cowardly orca on the lowsec gate farce which Heretics get into from time to time. Just sayin'The skilful employer of men will employ the wise man, the brave man, the covetous man, and the stupid man.Sun Tzuhttps://twitter.com/#/trinketsfriend

Posted - 2012.04.09 05:09:00 -
[690] - Quote
How did a Titan balancing thread get de-railed to a combat re-fitting discussion? So what if supers can refit .. the main problems with supers have nothing to do with that. And before that the discussion got side-tracked into nerfing the titan's guns through tracking/sig res reductions, etc. Seriously, the guns on a titan are nothing compared to the dps and the alpha of the 1 DD alone, which unlike the dread, does NOT require Siege.

Every way I look at it, the problem with the Titan is the DD, specifically the alpha and the dps. The problem with the MOMs is the dps. Hence the term, Supers Online. Flying any other ship, esp. non-super caps, is foolish with the threat of supers, which is everywhere thanks to cynos. Nerfs to super EHP and to log-off escapes certainly helped things a little, but let's look at the real problem. DD is so OP that MOMs can barely afford to be fielded, if it wasn't for their dps. So, I say, DD to structures only and boost dps to main guns to match the dread with the Titan in Siege. Siege enables DD and high gun dps. Similarly for MOMs, make fighter bombers only able to attack/hit structures. When hitting other caps, they must also use fighters. That would reduce the dps a bit while preserving the high dps FBs for strategic sov use in a manner similar to my proposed Titan change above. Both changes would probably be quite simple to make and easy to follow.

COPYRIGHT NOTICEEVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.